Monthly Archives: October 2020

#notyourcostume

by Rachael Smith

For many people Halloween is associated with the fun of dressing up in an elaborate costume, attending

Native American protesters stand outside the Phoenix office of a retailer of “sexy Native American” costumes last year. For some ethnic and racial groups, Halloween has long been haunted by costumes that perpetuate stereotypes and instances of cultural appropriation.

parties, and trick-or-treating.  Costumes are a huge part of many different cultures and have very significant meaning.  These costumes are often used as Halloween costumes.  People, adults and children alike, will dress up as a Native American, geisha, Día de los Muertos costumes complete with skull makeup.  Many people may see these costumes as accepting of other cultures but, in reality, it is cultural appropriation that makes culture into a caricature.  All meaning is lost, and negative stereotypes are reinforced especially when they are degraded into a “sexy” costume.  It is important to be aware of these stereotypes and the negative emotions felt by those whose cultures are being represented.

 

One of the main costumes every year is the Native American.  This has a number of problems.  First, the costume itself

The Ghost Dance Shirt that many costumes are based off of. It looks similar to those seen in stores.

is based on the clothing worn by tribes during a period of American expansion westward.  This was an extremely violent time when Native peoples were killed, forced from their homes, starved, and given many illnesses such as tuberculosis and smallpox.  Each time someone wears one of the standard “Indian” costumes, they are returning the still present Native American culture to a time of violence and colonial domination.  The costume itself is a form of continued domination over descendant communities by those in power. Not only do these costumes freeze Native American culture in the violent past but they are often based on the traditional Ghost Dance shirt.  The Ghost Dance shirt worn during traditional events was meant to protect the wearer from harm, specifically the harm inflicted by the U.S. Cavalry.  This movement ended with the bloody massacre of 300 men, women, and children at Wounded Knee on December 29, 1890.  This shirt is not a costume, it is a representation of an extremely violent period and a symbol of protection.

 

Another common costume is the catrina dress worn during Día de los Muertos.  A quick Google search of “catrina dresses” results in Amazon and Esty costumes, a Pintrest how-to link, and images mostly depicting sexily dressed women in black, red, and sometimes colorful dresses with skull make up and flowers.  This is not right or accurate.  Many people see Día de los Muertos as a Halloween spin-off

Traditional Dia de los Muertos garb and makeup

but in reality, it is a deeply seated cultural practice to honor and celebrate the dead.  The only connection it has to Halloween in a date (although it lasts for three days) and a skeleton motif.  It is part of someone’s culture that is being exploited for the entertainment of others who do not understand the meaning behind the outfit.  The Eiteljorg Museum is hosting a virtual celebration of Día de los Muertos between October 28 and November 2 featuring traditional dances, music, talks, art, and so much more.  The link is here.  Event like this teach people about the importance of understanding someone else’s culture by allowing people to experience it.  If you want to dress in a catrina, become part of the culture and truly celebrate the event as it is meant to be celebrated.

Wearing a cultural costume for Halloween is offensive and diminished the meaning of that culture.  It is racists and should not be done.  Instead of dressing as an Indian warrior or princess, use the opportunity to teach the public, children especially, how to respect other cultures and bring awareness to their current plights rather than keeping them frozen in their violence filled past.

 

Follow IUP Anthropology on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Some related and interesting links are here-

https://www.bustle.com/life/10-culturally-appropriative-halloween-costumes-you-should-never-wear-11941912

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/29/773615928/cultural-appropriation-a-perennial-issue-on-halloween

https://www.lakotatimes.com/articles/anniversary-of-return-of-ghost-dance-shirt/

 

Let’s Go Ghost Hunting

by Rachael Smith

Ghost stories are an extremely popular form of entertainment and even education.  Many historical sites give ghost tours and authors compile all the tales of specific areas to publish in one collection. This is especially true during the month of October and Halloween when we feel closer to the supernatural.  Archaeologists work with ruins, remains, and up close and personal with the ghosts of these stories.  Many of us have likely been asks if we have seen a ghost or what was the most haunted place we worked and have told our best creepy tale in response.  Ghost stories and archaeology can work hand in hand and often do.  April Beisaw in her 2016 paper Historical Archaeology as Ghost Hunting discusses the idea of our interactions with ‘ghosts of place’.  These are not your typical ghosts that pop out and say “BOO” but are the memories and phenomena attached to a particular place.  The excavations and research conducted by archaeologists are able to bring the ghosts of places to the present and inform the public about their existence.

Ghost hunting can also be used to teach history.

Ghost stories tell the same stories that archaeologists do.  Neither tales contain all the information and leave plenty of holes, specifically names, dates, and other specifics.  For example, we are excavating a set of ruins. We can tell that they were a house, likely during X time period, and were inhabited by this culture.  Likewise ghost stories have a house where a person died which was followed by a series of events when now led to the haunting.  Most of those stories are based in reality which archaeologists can help to find.  Archaeologists as storytellers and truth seekers bring memories and ghosts from the past into the present.  Along with the physical remains of things the ghosts left behind the ethnographies we rely on are also their own form of ghost stories.  While not always about ‘ghosts’ (memories of people) they are always about phenomenological ghosts like previous traditions and ways of life.  Memory is a form of ghost because it is the past which is in the present.

Using ghost hunting to educate the public is a great way to gain interest and make a lasting impression.  Such tours (mostly of historical sites) engage the public by used their interest in the paranormal.  But those tours also have a wealth of information about the sites.  The histories of the site are just as important to the tour and the visitors as the actual ghosts.  Without the backstory, the ghost doesn’t exist.  Archaeology can be difficult to communicate to the public and more often than not, people go straight to the paranormal and morbid questions.  So why not use that interest to our advantage.  The haunted Native American burial ground that people like to talk about can be explained by archaeologists and its importance can be better communicated through the cultural background and the who, why, how, and when.  The stories with the best reactions are always those that involve something creepy and unexplainable.  There will always be those things that cannot be explained, and ghost stories allow for those holes to remain.  In those cases, it is important that a person died in a specific room and less important to know their name or date of death.  The event can tell a story and can feel much more acceptable when told as a story instead of a fact. Just remember if you are going ghost hunting as for permission first.

Paranormal detecting instruments for your phone

Archaeologists ‘hunt’ ghosts of places and tell their stories.

For an interesting podcast about this topic check out here

Follow IUP Archaeology on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

A Stroll in a Cemetery

by Rachael Smith

Cemeteries are not just these spooky, misty places where monsters and ghosts hang out.  They are also a pumpkin full of information that archaeologists can explore.  One of the first things that people tend to think of when discussing archaeology and graves is grave robbing. In the past (Indiana Jones) archaeologists would have been considered grave robbers.  Many were sent to collect rare and priceless artifacts by museums, many of which were either located in graves (grave goods) or in other sacred sites.  Graves tend to have the precious metals (Agamemnon’s gold death mask) and intact artifacts that were deliberately placed with the deceased.  Nowadays, archaeologists try their best to leave graves undisturbed if they can.  Sometimes this is not an option, especially when graveyards are in the path of infrastructure projects.  During those cases, archaeologists work with the community and descendants of the deceased to relocate the graves with all the respect that they deserve.

Another aspect of graveyard archaeology people tend to think of is that archaeologists uncover unmarked graves from war, Native American and other past and ancient civilizations, very old unrecorded Christian cemeteries, and pyramids.

Deetz’s examination of Puritan Gravestone engravings and their frequency over time

While true in many cases the marked more modern-day cemeteries in church yards can offer a lot of information to archaeologists.  Much of this information is gathered by means other than excavation.  Excavating and analyzing human remains is a very controversial subject that brings into spiritual and moral issues.  While human remains can provide plenty of information, there is also plenty lying on the surface in the tombstones, cemetery layout, and church records.

A famous study conducted by James Deetz in 1977 examined the different engravings on headstones in New England Puritan cemetery and discovered a gradual change in cultural identity and ideology.  The markings shifted from the Death’s-head to cherub and finally a willow and urn design.  Each one represents a softening of the rather harsh death’s-head engraving.  Deetz also discovered that the inscriptions changed from a rather individualistic phrase to the now common “In Memory of…”.  Other archaeologists examined similarly aged cemeteries in New York to see if the trend was more local or denominational rather than regional.  They discovered that this trend of softening and commonality was true for other cemeteries.  Deetz and the other archaeologists were able to track iconography and cultural changes without putting a single shovel into the ground.

GPR Survey of a cemetery. The horizontal (usually white colored) lines are potential graves

Just because something is buried in a graveyard does not mean it is outside the reach of archaeologists.  Geophysical techniques such as ground-penetrating radar (GPR) make it possible to see changes under the ground without disturbing it or the spirits who rest there.  GPR sends radar waves into the ground and measures the time it takes for the wave to bounce off an object and return to the sensor.  Different objects, such as a coffin, and soil compositions, like a grave shaft, will bounce signals back at different times creating an anomaly in the GPR recording.  While GPR and other geophysical methods cannot specifically tell an archaeologist what an anomaly is, they can provide information of what possibly lies below the ground.  Graves then to be 2-meter-long rectangles that line up side by side with one another.  If such an anomaly pops up during a graveyard survey, it is likely a grave, especially when it is associated with a visible tombstone.  These types of surveys are great to locating possibly unmarked graves, determining the extent of an unmarked cemetery, and seeing if the current locations of tombstones line up with likely graves.

Using these non-invasive methods of cemetery analysis lessens controversial nature of the investigation.  Descendants and caretakers might be more willing to allow research that will not disturb the souls at rest.  These investigations also prevent the researchers from being haunted by the spirits that roam the grounds.

Follow IUP Anthropology at Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Spirit Cave Mummy

by Rachael Smith

It is now October, and Halloween is quickly approaching.  This means tricks, treats, and a lot of scary monsters.  One such monster is the infamous mummy! While mummies are usually associated with the cloth wrapped ones in the pyramids of Egypt, mummies can be found all over the world.  The United States has its own share of mummies including the Spirit Cave Mummy found in the 1940s in Nevada.  What distinguishes the Spirit Cave Mummy from those of Egypt is that it is a natural mummy, meaning that humans did not dehydrate and preserve this person as they do in Egypt.  In fact, radiocarbon dates determined that the Spirit Cave Mummy is 10,600 years old making it the oldest naturally created mummy.  While his age is extremely interesting for archaeology, it is actually his DNA and the issues surrounding his repatriation to the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe that are most informative.

Spirit Cave has long been claimed as ancestral land by the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe of Nevada.  The discovery of a set of mummified remains in this cave would further their claim on the land.  The mummy, discovered by Georgia and Sydney Wheeler in 1940, was determined a 40-year-old male who

Drawing of the Spirit Cave Mummy as he was discovered.

was wrapped in a rabbit-skin blanket and reed mats.  He was also wearing moccasins and associated with three other individual remains all of which were either cremated or partial.  Originally the Wheelers dated the remains to be 1,500-2,000 years ago, however, carbon dating revealed that they dated back to 10,600 years ago. Of course, the tribe wanted both the remains and associated artifacts to be returned for reburial.  According to the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the tribe should have been given the remains back. However, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) decided against this action in 2000.  In 2006, the tribe sued the government but all that led to was the US District Court ordering BLM to reconsider their decision.

The mummy was stored in the Nevada

DNA sequencing project conducted on various controversial remains throughout North America

museum and only available for limited research to determine ancestry.  Anthropologists Douglas Owsley and Richard Jantz examined the remains and only determined that the mummy’s skull was a different shape than current First Nations people’s.  The BML, with reluctant agreement from the Tribe, decided to allow DNA analysis to be conducted.  In 2015, evolutionary geneticist Eske Willerslev from the Natural History Museum of Denmark conducted the analysis and discovered that the mummy was more closely related to modern North and South American indigenous groups than another other modern population.  The remains were repatriated to the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone in 2016 and given a private burial in 2018.

Evolutionary geneticist Eske Willersley talking to two members of the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe

While valuable information about the movement of early humans in the Americas was gained through the DNA analysis of the Spirit Cave Mummy, it brings up an important issue surrounding the implementation of NAGPRA.  NAGPRA states that human remains should be returned to tribes who have a geographical association with the burial.  Even more DNA, the tribe had claim to the remains and the remains should have been returned when the tribe requested the action.  However, the problem with repatriating remains as old as the mummy is that it is difficult to prove that they are in fact First Nation.  We know so little about the early inhabitants of the continent that it is possible some remains discovered are entirely unrelated to the modern First Nations.  This problem was easily remedied through DNA analysis and the technique is likely to be employed on other controversial remains.  But the next question is does DNA relation to modern people actually matter in such a context?  The Spirit Cave Mummy’s DNA showed that he was actually more closely related to peoples from South America.  While some might say it does if the person is actually a relative, others may believe that everyone who inhabited the land before them is their ancestor.  This question is better left to the tribes.

Sources: https://www.history.com/news/oldest-mummy-discovery-spirit-cave-shoshone; https://www.nature.com/news/north-america-s-oldest-mummy-returned-to-us-tribe-after-genome-sequencing-1.21108; https://www.biotechniques.com/news/resolving-lawsuits-and-revealing-humanitys-genomic-history/

Follow IUP Anthropology on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

REAL Destruction

by Rachael Smith
Location of the border wall along the south border of Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument and Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge

Border wall location: Source NY Times

Many readers are likely aware of the construction of a border wall taking place along the boundary of the Organ Pipe National Monument.  While construction and infrastructure expansion are an inevitable part of society and has the potential to impact archaeological sites, this construction project has completely negated all cultural and environmental resources legislation and is currently destroying culturally sacred sites to the local Native American Tribes.  Normally, such projects go through a survey process laid out in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 to identify and mitigate damage to potentially important archaeological sites.  However, the REAL ID Act of 2005 allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive all local, state, and federal laws that would impacts construction along the border, negating all the efforts of past government officials to protect not only cultural resources and descendant communities, but also the environment and protected federal lands.

Numerous groups such as SAA

The Border wall going through Monument Hill Arizona. Source: Tuscon.com

and the Sierra Club have condemned the act and the actions following its approval.  SAA detailed their grievances in a letter to Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad F. Wolf demanding that all construction efforts cease until proper compliance regulations are completed (Link to letter here).  The construction has thus far destroyed many archaeological sites, sacred Native American burial grounds, and is currently threatening an oasis site which is not only sacred to the Tohono O’odham people but also of natural importance.  The project is using explosives to level Monument Hill, a burial location for Apache warriors.  Not only did the REAL ID Act of 2005 threaten irreplaceable resources, but it also threatens the checks and balances foundation of our government, give the Secretary of Homeland Security power over any law.

Image of Monument Hill showing a dust cloud from an explosion

Explosives being used on Monument Hill likely destroying burials. Source: azcentral.com

It is not only national and international organizations that have condemned these actions, but also news media outlets such as the Washington Post, The New York Times, NPR, and Smithsonian Magazine have also reported on the construction of this 30-foot high wall.  The lack of respect toward remains and burial grounds is not only morally abhorrent but completely goes against the principles of the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act, one of the many acts subverted Homeland Security.  All the laws in place that have been waives for this wall exist for a very good reason.  They are meant to protect human rights, culture, the environment, and endangered species while also allowing for infrastructure expansion.  These laws work in harmony with construction projects not against them.  Amazing things can happen if those at the top simply understand why these so-called blocks on progress exist, how they work, and their actual impact on construction projects.  They do not stop construction or prevent the destruction of all sites.  What they do is mitigate damage in creative and efficient ways.  This might mean a full-scale excavation of the impacted area, or a rerouting of a road, or it could be simply recording what is found and proceeding with the project as planned.  Archaeologists and environmentalists are here to help infrastructure not prevent it.

Follow IUP Anthropology on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram